🚀 go-pugleaf

Polarhound wrote:

>> Newsgroups line:
>> can.rec.motorcycles The owners and users of Motorcycles and related
>> topics in Canada.
> 
> Above does not match proposed charter.

Hrmmm...  perhaps.

How about:
can.rec.motorcycles  recreational motorcycling and related topics in Canada.

>> RATIONALE: can.rec.motorcycles
> 
> Name does not follow recognaized group naming patterns for can.* domain.

It most certainly does.  My news active file contains the following
groups:

   can.rec.fishing
   can.rec.boating
   can.rec.hunting
   can.rec.gardening

> Insufficient traffic to warrant separate group.

Based on the numbers shown in the proposal (and I admit I've not checked
them myself, yet), I don't agree.

>> Currently there is no specific group to discuss motorcycle specific
>> issues in a Canada wide forum.  ...
> 
> The net isn't "Canada-Wide".

Alright, perhaps this part of the rationale should reword "Canada wide"
to "Canada-specific", "Canada-centric", "Canadian", something else?

> What you propose is better suited to something along the lines of a
> yahoo group.

I disagree.  Web browsers make for a very poor interface to threaded
discussion.  Newsgroups are *the* place to hold such discussion.  The
proposal is for a newsgroup where discussion can take place, centering
around the topic of recreational motorcycling in Canada.  It sounds like
a pretty reasonable proposal to me.

> Users already have a multitude of areas to search for data.

Perhaps, but can they easily find fellow Canadians to discuss their
findings with?

> Insufficient detail to determine posting traffic.  Using "Honda Shadow"
> is inappropriate as it shows no relation to Canadian traffic, ...

True, but it does show that motorcycle owners are using netnews.  A
broader search would likely result in a larger number of results.

> Requestor used google.com instead of groups.google.com.

Using groups.google.com and restricting the search to posts of Canadian
interest would indeed be more appropriate.

> Also, if this group is going to cover all motorcycles, any specific
> manufacturer reference is not valid when searching for traffic numbers.

Perhaps, but broadening the search would likely result in larger
numbers.  The results we've already seen are not entirely without
usability.  If the proponent were to provide search results for 12
different motorcycle models, with a search criteria of various Canadian
regions, would this be more acceptable?

> Mailing lists and web based forums are not tradtionally used in
> determining whether sufficient traffic exists for a new group.

They're generally used as such an indicator in can.*.  If people are
already discussing the topic online, and it would benefit from a proper
mechanism to provide for threaded discussion, (neither mailing lists nor
web-based forums are optimized for such discussion the way that netnews
is), then indeed there is a reasonable argument for creation of the
newsgroup.

> For newcomers, alt.motorcycles, rec.motorcycles, and many other usenet
> groups are already available.

These are not specific to Canada, however.  Canadian laws, (for example),
affecting motorcyclists, are (or may be) different than those in other
countries.

> A search via groups.google.com for the period of April 5, 2003 to July 5,
> 2003 of 'motorcycle canada' shows a total of 1370 hits for an average of
> 15.22 per day.  Historically this is insufficient traffic to warrant
> creation of a new group.

Not in can.*, actually.  I've seen more than a few groups created in
can.* that I wish had 15 posts per day.  Broaden your search to include
various motorcycle models and related topics, and specific regions
within Canada, and you might actually see significantly greater numbers
than that.

>> An unmoderated newsgroup for discussing the Honda Shadow motorcycles 
>> and various related topics herein.
> 
> Wait a minute.... I thought this was for ALL motorcycles?!

The proponent is working on broadening the scope of a previous proposal.

> All of the above are already very well covered by rec.motorcycles,
> alt.motorcycles, ott.motorcycles, and subgroups thereof.  Creation of
> can.rec.motorcycles is redundant.

I disagree.  It can easily be argued that the discussions in
rec.motorcycles and alt.motorcycles do not center on Canadian-specific
interests, and ott.motorcycles is intended for discussion of motorcycle
related topics in and around the Ottawa, Ontario area.

>> alt.motorcycle.honda.nighthawk
> 
> No such group.

My news server (Newsflash.Concordia.CA) does see traffic for such a
group, though we don't actually carry it.  Just because it isn't carried
by Google, or other well connected news servers does not mean the group
doesn't exist.  (the group may not propagate very well, but it indeed
could exist ...)

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sylvain Robitaille                              syl@alcor.concordia.ca
 
Systems analyst / Newsmaster                      Concordia University
Instructional & Information Technology        Montreal, Quebec, Canada
----------------------------------------------------------------------